President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Memorex]

It seems that many, including myself, are focusing on the negatives. I think that's because we would have rather seen something a little more thought out and efficient and of course less of a hit on the pocketbook. Others, they just ignore the financial side of it and think it's great because now "everyone" can have health care.

I believe there are a lot of good things in the bill and other things that have a great spirit behind them, but which probably won't be executed very well.

I personally do not think you can have a bill that is 100% partisan, and which more the half the country disagrees with. This should not have been done the way it was done. Period. You cannot take such a major economic issue and completely ignore the other side's economic concerns. Similarly, you cannot always just worry about yourself and not consider that a comprehensive health policy may help others.

I like that a child can stay on the plan until 26. This is an easy one because most people under 26 have very little health care costs and in today's economy, many young adults are living at home longer. As far as pre-existing conditions - tricky. It sounds great. But really tips the scale of risk for the insurance companies. And insurance companies pass any and all risk along to the consumer, as they should if they want to stay in business.

What I don't like is the penalty (tax), the new army of IRS agents, etc. The lowering of the health savings account limit to $2,500 is a horrible decision.

So I ask those that have defended this thing - do you have any ability to understand some of mine and others' concerns? Can you not step back and see that while this may help many, it's also going to raise prices and lower the actual health "care" that many now receive? It's going to be interesting (and probably very sad and frustrating) to see how millions of new patients are added with no additional medical personnel, facilities, etc. If our health system becomes one big VA (health care for veterans), we are in a world of trouble.

[Memorex]

From the white house this morning at the bottom of their spin on the jobs numbers:

As the Administration stresses every month, the monthly employment and unemployment figures can be volatile, and employment estimates can be subject to substantial revision. Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.

I sure hope they don't want anyone looking into that statement. With the rare exception, the revised numbers are ALWAYS worse then the initial numbers.

[Rick]

Ha, this thread is now on the second page of the google link I posted just above.

It came up less than half way down the first page for me. Two entries right in a row from this thread.

[rsimpson]

A fresh round of Democrats has announced they will not be attending the party convention in Charlotte. Most troublingly for President Obama, several of them are from North Carolina, and not only have they decided not to drop in on a convention held in their own state, they’ve refused to endorse Obama for president in 2012.

The latest round of Democrats fleeing from Obama include North Carolina congressmen Mike McIntyre and Larry Kissell, plus candidate Hayden Rogers.

Don't forget the republicans fleeing from their convention.

[The Sushi Hunter]

I guess he wants to see someone in office that has a serious axe to grind with the white man.

http://now.msn.com/entertainment/0706-m ... ident.aspx

[Monker]

I flesh out the true info, and provide sources

You don't 'flesh out' anything. You wait for somebody else to call you on it and then you start backtracking. You did NOT provide a source for either the original spam Email I looked up on Snopes, or the last biased article I had to look up.

So, now you are not just misleading - but flat out lying about it.

The fucking Joint Committee on Taxation even says themselves that this new tax is expected to raise $123 Billion over the next 10 years.

Not according to YOU...according to other articles you post. Go to the JCT website, look up the PDF for 2013 tax revenues and YOU dig through it and post this $123 billion from Capital Gains from home sales that that PDF. If you find that, and post that, then I'll believe the JCT says that. Until then, you are wasting your time.

I did a quick scan for 123 and didn't find this number anywhere.

Monker, what is your deal with evading the truth? I know, I know, you're a liberal, truth means whatever you want it to be. Damn the facts.

No, I want facts....not opnionating from biased sources or even extrapolating guesswork from non biased sources. YOU and many others here, and in the world at large, actually...search for facts that back up your already formed opinion. Until then, I really don't have much opinion about it at all...except I know that neither the home sale thing nor the Capital Gains thing will affect me AT ALL, nor anybody else I know. And, my opinion is that Capital Gains should be added to your income and not taxed separately anyway...so whatever.

[Monker]

A fresh round of Democrats has announced they will not be attending the party convention in Charlotte. Most troublingly for President Obama, several of them are from North Carolina, and not only have they decided not to drop in on a convention held in their own state, they’ve refused to endorse Obama for president in 2012.

The latest round of Democrats fleeing from Obama include North Carolina congressmen Mike McIntyre and Larry Kissell, plus candidate Hayden Rogers.

Don't forget the republicans fleeing from their convention.

It happened to Clinton, too...and he had multiple scandals to deal with, and trampled Dole.

[rsimpson]

A fresh round of Democrats has announced they will not be attending the party convention in Charlotte. Most troublingly for President Obama, several of them are from North Carolina, and not only have they decided not to drop in on a convention held in their own state, they’ve refused to endorse Obama for president in 2012.

The latest round of Democrats fleeing from Obama include North Carolina congressmen Mike McIntyre and Larry Kissell, plus candidate Hayden Rogers.

Don't forget the republicans fleeing from their convention.

It happened to Clinton, too...and he had multiple scandals to deal with, and trampled Dole.

Not sure if you read the story, but I like Jon Huntsmen reasoning.

[Monker]

I personally do not think you can have a bill that is 100% partisan, and which more the half the country disagrees with. This should not have been done the way it was done. Period. You cannot take such a major economic issue and completely ignore the other side's economic concerns. Similarly, you cannot always just worry about yourself and not consider that a comprehensive health policy may help others.

So, what should have been done differently? Did the debate not last long enough in congress so the Repuplicans did not have their voice spoken in that time? Did the Democrats not compromise enough times, removing piece after piece that they wanted but the Republicans argued against...but still would not vote for it after they got what they wanted? Should the Democrats have waited even longer to 'shove the bill down their throats'...Republicans have long necks for elephants...maybe it went down their trunks.

The bottom line, IMO, is the political process failed on this bill. It failed because the Republicans refused to compromise in good faith. It failed because the Democrats are pussies, and the Republicans know it, so they didn't start shoving until the bill was watered way down

It was the wrong time to do it, in a recession. At the same time, if the Democrats did not get it done, it would have never happened at all. So, you got what you got from a failed political process in congress.

What I don't like is the penalty (tax), the new army of IRS agents, etc. The lowering of the health savings account limit to $2,500 is a horrible decision.

Now I have heard in this forum that it lowere the FSA and the HSA. They are two different things - is it one or the other, or both?

So I ask those that have defended this thing - do you have any ability to understand some of mine and others' concerns? Can you not step back and see that while this may help many, it's also going to raise prices and lower the actual health "care" that many now receive?

No, I can't say that...because it is predicting an unpredictable future. If you are believing that prediction as fact, you are misguided and a bit naive. NOBODY can predict the future for such a complicated piece of legislation like this. I don't care which side you are on, if you think what you posted above can be predicted - you are flat out wrong.

Read and learn:
http://www.wbsi.org/ilfdigest/commentaries_mar_04.htm

It's going to be interesting (and probably very sad and frustrating) to see how millions of new patients are added with no additional medical personnel, facilities, etc.

You don't KNOW that is going to happen. Right now, people are using the emergency room for things like the flu...Or, they wait until they ARE in dire need before they seek attention...because they don't have health insurance. In either situation, the patient doesn't pay...meaning costs go UP for everybody else. Preventive care LOWERS cost for everybody. That is a simple fact. How it washes out, NOBODY knows...saying cost is going to shoot up is a wild guess where a million variables going up or down could prove it wrong, or right...but, IMO, these extreme predictions are almost always wrong.

[slucero]

Summary

Medicare is a federal program that pays for covered health services for most persons 65 years old and older and for most permanently disabled individuals under the age of 65. The rising cost of health care, the impact of the aging baby boomer generation, and declining revenues in a weakened economy continue to challenge the program’s ability to provide quality and effective health services to its 45 million beneficiaries in a financially sustainable manner.

On March 23, 2010, the President signed into law H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA; P.L. 111-148), as passed by the Senate on December 24, 2009, and the House on March 21, 2010. The new law will, among other things, make numerous statutory changes to the Medicare program. On March 30, 2010, the President signed into law H.R. 4872, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (the “Reconciliation Act,” or HCERA; .L. 111-152), which modifies a number of Medicare provisions in PPACA and adds several new provisions.

This report, one of a series of CRS products on PPACA and the Reconciliation Act, examines the Medicare related provisions in these Acts. Estimates from CBO on PPACA and the Reconciliation Act indicate that net reductions in Medicare direct spending will reach approximately $390 billion from FY2010 to FY2019. Major savings are expected from constraining Medicare’sannual payment increases for certain providers, basing payment rates in the Medicare Advantage program on average bids, reducing payments to hospitals that serve a large number of low- income patients, creating an independent Payment Advisory Board to make changes in Medicare payment rates, and modifying the high-income threshold adjustment for Part B premiums.

A new Hospital Insurance tax for high-wage earners will also raise approximately $87 billion over 10 years, and a new Medicare tax on net investment income, added by the Reconciliation Act, is expected to raise an additional $123 billion over 10 years.

Other provisions in PPACA address more systemic issues, such as increasing the efficiency and quality of Medicare services and strengthening program integrity. For example, PPACA requires the establishment of a national, voluntary pilot program that will bundle payments for physician, hospital, and post-acute care services with the goal of improving patient care and reducing spending. Another provision adjusts payments to hospitals for readmissions related to certain
potentially preventable conditions. In addition, PPACA subjects providers and suppliers to enhanced screening before allowing them to participate in the Medicare program, and both PPACA and the Reconciliation Act increase funding for anti-fraud activities.

PPACA also improves some benefits provided to Medicare beneficiaries. For instance, Medicare prescription drug program enrollees will receive a 50% discount off the price of brand-name drugs during the coverage gap (the “doughnut hole”) starting in 2011, and the coverage gap will be phased out by 2020. Other provisions expand assistance for some low-income beneficiaries enrolled in the Medicare drug program, and eliminate beneficiary copayments for certain preventive care services.

[Monker]

Finally some back up, thank ya kindly.

There are 2 new taxes coming on high wage earners. 1 is a raise in the medicade tax on high earners from 2.9% to 3.8%. (Over 200K/250K) The second tax, which has Monker ALL riled up is a tax on Investment Income from High earners. Both taxes together are estimated to raise $210 billion over the next 10 years, with $123 Billion coming from the Investment Income tax. It will be the single biggest revenue raiser for Obamacare. That's a FACT.

No, what I have been disputing was you saying 67,000 people are affected....with a calculation that was totally off and wrong. Then you somehow 'correct' it by going UP to 670,000 people with an equally bad calculation. Gee, for some reason you have totally moved on from that. Probably because you have the answer and are /were trying to find the calculation.

Then you go and post article after article saying the JCT says this and that and 123billion, blah, blah, blah. So, I ask you to go to the JCT website and find the article. So, now you post a report from a completely different group that again points to the number from the JCT. So, it's not what I asked for and really isn't much different then what you have already done.

Go here and find that number....I want to know how it is calculated to 670,000: https://www.jct.gov/

[AR]

I am not convinced that all the uninsured currently that are treated is more expensive than this 2700 page folly that none of us really understand if we are honest. I see the system being flooded and a mess in our future. Let it happen. I haven't been to a doctor since grade school. I only care about my wife and daughter being seen promptly and I pay for it. Fuck the rest of you if you aren't employed or covered. Sorry.

The system needs SOME change but not drastic things no one really gets from these boobs.

Prescription drug costs need to be looked at and some softening of people with pre-existing conditions, although those people need to understand that you ARE going to be charged more. It sucks, but that isn't going to change. Like anything else in life, it is not someone else's fault you got dealt a shitty hand. Just fight harder to stay healthy.

[slucero]

Some interesting data points:

With the US presidential election just 4 months away, focus on tier 1 economic data will become acute, as will headlines blasting top-line data without much, if any, underlying "between the lines" analysis. Which is why we have decided to put together a template of key data series that in our opinion best capture the dramatic shift in the labor composition of the US welfare state under the Obama administration, starting with January 2009. Here are the facts:

• Total Nonfarm Payrolls have decreased by -1.3 million from December 2008 (134,379K) to June 2012 (133,088);
  Source: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/PAYEMS.txt
• Full-time jobs based on the Household Survey, have decreased by 2.5 million from 117,039K to 114,573K;
  Source: http://bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab9.htm
• Parti-time jobs based on the Household Survey, have increased by 1.6 million from 26,3187 to 27,894K;
  Source: http://bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab9.htm
• Foodstamps recipients have increased by 14.6 million from 31.567 million to 46,187 (as of April 2012);
  Source: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/34SNAPmonthly.htm
• Disability recipients have increased by 1.3 million from 7.427 million to 8.733 million; Source: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/cgi-bin/currentpay.cgi

And that, in a nutshell, is how the economy has performed over the past 42 months.


Visually:



Which, however, is not to say that in addition to millions on foodstamps and disability, and just over a million part-time workers added, the US has little to show for the last three and a half years: as the chart below shows, over the same time period Total Public Debt to GDP has risen from 76.7% to 101.7%, a 25% increase in absolute terms.





http://www.zerohedge.com/news/economic- ... nistration

[The Sushi Hunter]

Work harder! Millions of individuals on welfare and soon Obamacare depend on you.

[Behshad]

Work harder! Millions of individuals on welfare and soon Obamacare depend on you.

Those who are on wellfare and depend on you NOW and get FREE HEALTHCARE, will soon have to start PAYING for it, so means less out of your pocket for
what theyve enjoyed for years. YOU will only pay your extra tax(penalty) if you stop carrying insurance, but not paying their penalty !

[Memorex]

Crazy talk. Just crazy.

[The Sushi Hunter]

Work harder! Millions of individuals on welfare and soon Obamacare depend on you.

Those who are on wellfare and depend on you NOW and get FREE HEALTHCARE, will soon have to start PAYING for it, so means less out of your pocket for
what theyve enjoyed for years. YOU will only pay your extra tax(penalty) if you stop carrying insurance, but not paying their penalty !

So what makes you think these welfare government assistance sponges can come up with money for their health insurance, or the tax penalty for not having health care if they are dependent on the US tax payers for their welfare money in the first place?

[Memorex]

That's the rub. They don't have to. Health care will still be free for them via subsidies, paid for by you know who.

[The Sushi Hunter]

That's the rub. They don't have to. Health care will still be free for them via subsidies, paid for by you know who.

Yeah, I figure that in the 200 plus page Obamacare document there's something in it that states welfare and government assistance sponges are exempt from having to purchase healthcare and are also exempt from having to pay the tax penalty for not having any.

[RedWingFan]

[Behshad]

[Behshad]

Calm down FakeFinder ,
worse case scenario you will just have to pay for monker's insurance. Brotherhood and solidarity

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Except that hes not, and he never will when he is elected President. He had the same damn thing in Massachusetts!

[The Sushi Hunter]

Just think of all the Nike shoe stores that will be looted once it finally sinks in that Obama paying everyone's bills is a hoax.

[Behshad]

[The Sushi Hunter]

Money is for people who work.

[Behshad]

Using the new CBO figure that Obamacare will cost $2.6 Trillion over 10 years

$2.6 Trillion divided by 10 = $260 Billion

two hundred sixty billion / 320 million = $812.50


So every man woman and child is now on the hook for $812 a year.

Now to explain this to Behshad and Monker. Why the poor will not pay but the rich will.

EITC is the answer. As we all know, there are millions of tax filers every year who get a refundable EITC credit when in fact they haven't paid any income taxes. This is a government handout from the rich to the poor via tax policy. John and Sally make $18,000 per year and have 2 kids. Their tax burden is zero, yet after figuring the EITC they magically get a $3,500 tax refund.

The new tax forms with the Obamacare penalty built in, will reduce this refund amount by $695 per person x 3. (That's the new law) So $695 x 3 is $2085. Now John and Sallys tax refund will be closer to $1400 and they will have effectivly "Paid" for their own healthcare using the EITC as the source. Now the EITC is free money for John and Sally from whom...."The Dreaded Rich", who pay thousands upon thousand per year in taxes. So the net effect is just what Obama said.."Spread the Wealth around". And that Behshad, is how the poor will not pay for this mess.

I dont think you ever understand that the poor is actually the middle class that WILL always pay. The rich will never pay cause through tax loopholes they always get away with paying $0.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Now to explain this to Behshad and Monker. Why the poor will not pay but the rich will.

And that Behshad, is how the poor will not pay for this mess.

Actually its worse than that, the rich and middle class will pay, but poor will receive even a worse, rationed free health care service (so they will effectively pay too.
Everyone will pay more and get shit for it.

[Behshad]

Using the new CBO figure that Obamacare will cost $2.6 Trillion over 10 years

$2.6 Trillion divided by 10 = $260 Billion

two hundred sixty billion / 320 million = $812.50


So every man woman and child is now on the hook for $812 a year.

Now to explain this to Behshad and Monker. Why the poor will not pay but the rich will.

EITC is the answer. As we all know, there are millions of tax filers every year who get a refundable EITC credit when in fact they haven't paid any income taxes. This is a government handout from the rich to the poor via tax policy. John and Sally make $18,000 per year and have 2 kids. Their tax burden is zero, yet after figuring the EITC they magically get a $3,500 tax refund.

The new tax forms with the Obamacare penalty built in, will reduce this refund amount by $695 per person x 3. (That's the new law) So $695 x 3 is $2085. Now John and Sallys tax refund will be closer to $1400 and they will have effectivly "Paid" for their own healthcare using the EITC as the source. Now the EITC is free money for John and Sally from whom...."The Dreaded Rich", who pay thousands upon thousand per year in taxes. So the net effect is just what Obama said.."Spread the Wealth around". And that Behshad, is how the poor will not pay for this mess.

I dont think you ever understand that the poor is actually the middle class that WILL always pay. The rich will never pay cause through tax loopholes they always get away with paying $0.

Now you're just being stupid B. I can't argue with stoOpid.

You cant argue with reality, We have had this discussion before and if youre gonna stick your head in the sand and deny the fact that the rich do write offs and pay less tax than you and I, then you're the StoPid one. You know, your ideas are similiar to farts: unique and different but always stink!

[Behshad]

I think anyone going by articles in Washington Times is the StoOpid one !